Slashdot Mirror
Lessig Spins Copyright Law
ceebABC writes "In the always riveting CIO Insight magazine, tech-pundit (and professor) Lawrence Lessig examines the copyright laws and how they can be applied to e-books and other electronic forms of rights management... i.e., in today's world, the author doesn't receive a royalty everytime someone reads a book from the library. Will they in the future?"
you can always check here
The ultimate goal of most publishers is likely to be pay-per-read. In other words, royalties for the PUBLISHER. The author might recieve 0.00000001% of this, or something like that, if they are lucky.
The publishers are out of luck if they want to kill an author's percentage.
For most, it's contractually set at a certain rate (whole percantage points of the gross sale), and the publisher making MORE money only means more money for the author.
Last numbers I heard had an author's royalties at somewhere between 1% and 5%. And the big names--those that bring in the massive ammounts of sales that keep publishers in busienss--certainly won't sell their already-done-and-anyone-can-print-it books for less than this.
that Lessig movie everybody is always playing, which is far more easy to digest. It's in Flash so it works great in Windows. Lessig is the same author as the article by the way.
Why Slashdot is under attack
Lawrence Lessig. <free culture>. Intro. Over the past three years, Lessig
has given more than 100 talks like the one captured here.
randomfoo.net/oscon/2002/lessig/ - 7k - Cached
Eldred v. Ashcroft
... 10 had a favourable piece on Lessig and the lawsuit. ... October 13, 2002 - Amy ...
Harmon of New York Times: uphill battle over copyright. more news
eldred.cc/ - 7k - Cached -
The Limits of Copyright
... it an offense to write code to interfere with this use-controlling code, regardless ...
of whether the use would be considered fair under the copyright law.
www.thestandard.com/article/display/ 0,1151,16071,00.html - 34k - Dec. 12, 2002 - Cached -
Copyright law and roasted pig. ...
Communications Copyright law and roasted pig Lawrence Lessig on Eldred v. Ascroft
By Lawrence Lessig October 22, 2002. In 1930, 10,027 books were published.
www.redherring.com/insider/2002/10/ roast-pig-copyright-102202.html - 29k - Cached -
O'Reilly Network: Free Culture: Lawrence Lessig Keynote from ...
... A flash version of Lessig's presentation, including audio and other source files. ... their ...
i g.html - 27k - Dec. 12, 2002 - Cached -
works) instead of exercising all of the restrictions of copyright law.
www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/policy/2002/08/15/less
High court weighs copyright law - Tech News - CNET.com
... Lessig and his allies are hoping not merely to overturn this law, however, but ...
to build momentum for an all-out legal assault on many recent copyright
news.com.com/2100-1023-961467.html - 28k - Cached -
Lawrence Lessig
... Declan McCullagh of CNET News.com mentions Professor Lessig in Left gets nod from ...
right on copyright law, on a speech given by Appeals Court Judge Richard
cyberlaw.stanford.edu/lessig/ - 23k - Dec. 12, 2002 - Cached -
Home--Berkman Center for Internet and Society
... Also see: Digitial Copyright Law on Trial [CNet]; Google Excluding Controversial ... the Hard Questions: On October 9 Lawrence Lessig appeared before ...
Sites [CNet];
Description: The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School is a research program founded...
Category: Computers>Internet>Policy
cyber.law.harvard.edu/ - 13k - Cached -
Techdirt:Copyright Law And Roasted Pig - Lessig Pushes His ... ...
l - 5k - Cached -
Copyright Law And Roasted Pig - Lessig Pushes His Campaign Forward.
Ramblings Contributed by Mike on Tuesday, October 22nd, 2002
www.techdirt.com/articles/20021022/1311202.shtm
If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
This story, which you all really should have read by now, depicts a world of copyright/DRM/Etc. laws to the extreme:
The Right to Read
The scariest line definitely comes after:
most of the specific laws and practices described above have already been proposed
A Minesweeper clone that doesn't suck
Treasure Planet - Treasure Island (duh)
Snow White - Grim
Pinocchio - Grim
Cinderella - Grim
Peter Pan
Sleeping Beauty - Grimm
The Jungle Book - Kipling
The Little Mermaid - Andersen
Beauty and the Beast
Alice in Wonderland - Carrol
I may be wrong on the authors (from memory) but those are all books in the Public Domain that have been hijacked by Disney, and are aggressively defended by them.
Funny.
Everyone always bitches about the big companies saying the authors or artists get nothing so it's ok to steal from them anyways! If you buy a book, and the author gets $0.05 for each book sold, or you steal a book(Gnutella, etc) they get nothing! So the big boys take most of the money? That's a completely different problem from everyone else literally stealing from the authors!(Hey a pun! Where'd that come from?). So quit bitching about the RIAA taking all of the money or the publishers taking all of the money. Publishers generally actually pay pretty well, compare it to self-publishing and you'll see _why_ publishers take alot of the money. I know, this is off-topic because I agree completely with Lessig about copyright law, but I'm sick and tired of people bashing the big boys and saying the little guys get only 0.00000001% of anything, that's still something and if no one buys the book, they get 0.0000000000% and that's 100% less! So go out there and buy some god-damned books and CDs. We all do piracy, I'm sure, to an extent, but doing it because the authors/artists would otherwise get almost nothing is not better than them simply getting nothing! Quit changing the topic to allow yourself to pirate.
Don't mod me down because you disagree with me, mod me up and maybe get people to say something insightful.
Pinocchio - Grim
The Adventures of Pinocchio is not by the Grimm Bros. but rather by Carlo "Collodi" Lorenzini. You can read about Collodi, or read an English translation of Pinocchio .
books in the Public Domain that have been hijacked by Disney, and are aggressively defended by them.
The Walt Disney Company does not own the rights to the novel Pinocchio or to the name "Pinocchio". DisneyCo owns only the copyright on its film adaptation[1], including the likenesses of the characters as drawn by Disney animators, and has no grounds to prevent other publishers' film adaptations of the original novel. DisneyCo most definitely does not own the rights to "Noddy", a character created by Enid Blyton that may have been inspired by Pinocchio.
The Jungle Book - Kipling
Which exemplifies . No less than one year after The Jungle Book went PD in a major market, DisneyCo published a film adaptation. The company was obviously waiting for the copyright to run out. Now DisneyCo has closed the door behind itself by pushing copyright term extensions through Congress.
Peter Pan
NOT IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN WORLDWIDE! The European Union recognizes a monopoly on literary works for the life of the last surviving author, plus the remainder of the calendar year, plus 70 years. Because J. M. Barrie, the author of Peter Pan, died in 1937, copyright in Peter Pan does not expire in the European Union until 2007, and DisneyCo has to pay GOSH a royalty for every Peter Pan and Return to Never Land disc sold in the EU. In fact, the United Kingdom has granted a statutory perpetual copyright on the work, with royalties going to a children's hospital.
[1] DisneyCo may lose even that if the Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft happens to strike down the 1976 extension along with the Bono Act.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The LA Public Library has something called "Project Bestseller". If you don't want to wait forever for a copy of a currently bestselling book to become available (I waited 4 months for "Shelters of Stone" -- what a waste), you can check out books from the PB shelf. These books are actually rented at $0.15 per day. They are also available to borrow for free, but you generally have to wait for them.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Sorry but I do not agree to this.
By doing this, you are creating a new right, a new business model whereby Libraries, which do not currently pay anything beyond the initial purchase price for the book, now have to pay the equivalent to a licensing fee for the books it owns. This is a rotten deal, because even if at the beginning it is 1/10, it will eventually go up to 1/1.
If we combine this with the forever extended copyright, then we have the equivalent of Stallman's short story. I'd rather have libraries pay full price on initial purchase so that everyone can read for free forever.